Explain Why The House Of Lords Should Be Abolished Essay

1106 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Describe the function role and influence of both the house of commons and the house of lords

The House of Lords is the upper, unelected house of the Houses of Parliament, according to the Westminster model. It consists of Life Peers who are appointed; Hereditary peers who inherited their seats; and Lords Spiritual whoa re important members of the Church of England. They have roles in scrutiny and accountability and also legislation. This essay will discuss the functions of the House of Lords and evaluate whether it should be abolished or not. This will be achieved by addressing its role in scrutiny and accountability, and by considering the issue of it being unelected and therefore not representative, while also looking at options for reform. The first reason why the House of Lords should be abolished is because it is fundamentally undemocratic. The fact that the peers are unelected and that 92 of them are there because of birthright and not merit makes the House anachronistic and antiquated. A large number of those appointed have also gotten their seat through …show more content…

The House of Lords is a functioning body that does good work and therefore the issues that it does have should be improved, rather than lead to the whole thing being dissolved. The previous steps to reforming the house have been successful in both making it less powerful and more legitimate. The 1911 and 1949 Parliaments Acts limited the House of Lords’ power to block government legislation and this means that although the Lords are unelected they don’t have enough power to challenge the government that much, as we have a system of asymmetrical bicameralism, and this means that the choices of the people are usually carried out with occasional changes to make sure the government is doing its duty properly. There is also the 1999 House of Lords Act, which removed all but 92 of the hereditary peers, and this made the house more meritocratic and representative, which increased its

Show More
Related

  • The Arguments For and Against the Claim that the Puritans Presented a Challenge in the Elizabethan House of Commons

    610 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Arguments For and Against the Claim that the Puritans Presented a Challenge in the Elizabethan House of Commons

    Read More

  • Marbury Vs. Madison Cases In History Of The Supreme Court Case

    1117 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many operate under the principle referred to as the law of the land, which especially true of England and the Netherlands. This concept finds its basis on the ideas of the elected parliament as to their declarations of the precepts of the law as they view it. This particular reasoning evolved via the death of Charles Stuart, the king of England, upon his execution on January 30th, 1649. As a result, of the execution, England had no central ruler and the constituents of the House of Commons began the duty of transforming the government. Because the House of Lords opposed the trial of the tyrannical king, the House of Commons declared itself the ruling body negating any power the House of Lords possessed and thus, abolishing it. Consequently, the House of Commons maintained that it would become their responsibility to protect not only the liberty, but also the safe being, and the interest of the public at large, thus Parliament came into being (Lee, n.d.). Furthermore, they mandated that a single person having sole power presented a danger to the whole of the public welfare and the monarchy existence was figuratively only. Because of these acts, with the abolishment of the House of Lords and the monarchy as such, a contingency of forty-one members comprising the Council of State became the ruling authority establishing the laws of the

    Read More

  • To What Extent Was Parliament To Blame For The English Civil War

    1894 Words  | 4 Pages

    During the rule of King Charles I, the Parliament had limited powers, and were not entitled to govern independently as a Parliament should. This is shown through King Charles’ power to veto their decisions, and his dissolving of the Parliament three times between 1625-1629. Consequently, the Parliament became frustrated with their minute role, and responded in attempt to control the King’s power, to maintain their control. This is clearly depicted in their refusal to grant tax raising and revenue for Charles’ increased expenditure, including the abolishment of the ‘ship tax’ which had been previously collected illegally. Following on from this was the enactment of legislation through the Petition of Right in 1928, after MP’s had been called back by Charles in his third parliament. The Petition of Right demanded that Charles could not imprison anyone without being found guilty in a court of law, that no tax could be implemented without Parliamentary consent, and soldiers could not be billeted against their will. Furthermore, the Parliament also abolished the Court of High Commission and the Star Chamber, disallowing for Charles to continue the arbitrary punishment of opposers to his reforms. The Parliament’s pressure on Charles through these reforms was largely driven by

    Read More

  • How effective is the Westminster Parliament in holding the executive to account?

    926 Words  | 2 Pages

    In terms of scrutinizing the executive and actions of government, the House of Commons has a number of opportunities at its disposal, mainly in the form of debates and questions. The Commons is notorious for its constant debate; the Commons can express its views on foreign policy and international crisis, for example the 1956 debates of the Suez crisis and the emergency debate on the Falklands following the Argentinean invasion in 1982. Question time is also a very important example of an opportunity for the executive’s actions and plans to be publicly questioned as the meeting is now frequently featured on TV news and politics analysis programmes. This allows Her Majesty’s Royal Opposition to challenge the exec...

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay: Should Senate Be Abolished?

    615 Words  | 2 Pages

    Today, there is a major issue about Parliament related to Senate. The Senate usually examine bills to make sure that they are the most benefitting choice. They are also in charge of protecting the rights and interests of Canadians. As a result, Senate can be referred as a "sober second thought." However, a large number of Canadians disagree this and think that Senate should be abolished. Certainly, Senate is the useless system which rather affects society in a negative way. This is because the Senate costs lots of money, it is unfair system and the Senators do not perform any significant actions.

    Read More

  • George III Dbq

    1672 Words  | 4 Pages

    So whilst the government certainly faced political challenges, there was insufficient unity amongst those calling for reform to make enough of an impact on government. The government may have been under pressure to concede some concessions, but they managed to come out of it relatively unscathed. During times of national crisis patriotism saved the day, and unlike in France, revolution never seemed likely. By managing to avoid conflict between classes and social groups, the strength of the British system of government had been its ability to manage evolutionary, rather than revolutionary political

    Read More

  • The English Legal System

    1787 Words  | 4 Pages

    The English legal system is complex and there are many ways in which it can be influenced, this essay will explore some of the different, more obvious ways the law can be changed and what this shows in relation to the quote above. First the essay will discuss the different ways the law can be created and changed and who enables and controls those changes, with my primary examples being the common law and legislation for the judicracy and Parliament respectively, then the essay will cover to what extent these powers enable the judicracy to change and create law in relation to Parliament and if it could be discribed as "opportunistic and piecemeal".

    Read More

  • Three Estates

    490 Words  | 1 Pages

    importance." (Loades 93) But the Parliament did also have its faults. It had a separation between the House of Lords and the House of Commons. The House of the Lords was closer to the court, highly spiritual, and made themselves to the hand of the monarch.

    Read More

  • Civil War in Ireland in 1914

    575 Words  | 2 Pages

    When the Parliament Act of 1912 was passed it removed a huge obstacle. in the way of the home rule bill due to the fact that the House of Lords could not reject the bill if it had passed the House of Commons. three times and could delay the bill for up to two years. So in 1912 the third home rule bill was introduced by the liberals and Having made it through the Commons by Jan 1913 it was rejected by the Lords but would only have to wait until 1914 to become law under the new Parliament Act. Understandably, the introduction of a third home rule bill sparked a major political crisis and the time between the bill being rejected.

    Read More

  • What Does Rothermere Mean To Be A Nationalist?

    723 Words  | 2 Pages

    It was seemingly clear that the role of the aristocracy and House of Lords in governance had long been called into question but was slowly falling entirely apart. Future Prime Minister and Liberal Party MP, David Lloyd-George said in a speech in 1909, “should 500 men, ordinary men, chosen accidentally from among the unemployed, override the judgment...of millions of people who are engaged in the industry which makes the wealth of the country?” This malcontent with regards to the political power of the aristocracy would surface in legislation shortly thereafter. The 1911 Parliament Act removed the House of Lords’ role in financial legislation and curtailed their veto over ordinary legislation.” Needless to say, the stripping of a historically powerful class of political power and importance would seemingly lead to antagonism, and Pugh wrote, “not surprisingly, as titled families became conscious of their political marginalization, angered by the collapse of agriculture and land values, and fearful of Britain’s retreat from Empire, some of their members embroiled themselves in extremist movements.”

    Read More

  • Parliamentary Sovereignty Or The Rule Of Law Essay

    858 Words  | 2 Pages

    An issue that has remained debatable since the Jackson litigation was what ought to be the ultimate controlling factor in the British constitution: parliamentary sovereignty or the rule of law. This essay sets out to consider the reputedly irreconcilable tension between the two fundamental constitutional principles by analysing the extensive obiter dicta in Jackson and relating it to judicial review which upholds the rule of law. The contention of this essay is that despite the courts' deferential attitude towards the sovereignty of the laws of Parliament, the rule of law may potentially gain dominance and surpass parliamentary sovereignty to become the ultimate controlling factor in the British constitution.

    Read More

  • The Royal Prerogative

    2051 Words  | 5 Pages

    The extent to which the judiciary and the legislature are able to regulate the exercise of prerogative powers by the executive has increased. However, there are still some who are concerned by the lack of control that can be exerted by the other constitutional bodies. The challenges to the power of the Monarch was by the reign of James I (1603-25) the monarch was faced with an increasingly effective Parliament, culminating in the temporary abolition of the monarchy in (1625). Consequently, the monarchy’s powers were eroded by both revolution and by legal challenges, which included the case of Proclamations (1611), the monarchy could not change the law by proclamation. The law of the land, which required that the law be made by Parliament, limited the prerogative.

    Read More

  • The Parliamentary Legislative Process

    1087 Words  | 3 Pages

    Although Parliament does not usually make law, it has the important role of scrutinising Bills. This involves close inspection and proposed amendments made by both the House of Commons and the House of

    Read More

  • The House of Commons

    949 Words  | 2 Pages

    is the House of Commons a law-maker in the true sense of the word. The

    Read More

  • Fall of Man in John Milton’s Epic Poem, Paradise Lost

    930 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the reign of Charles I, the people of England were divided into two groups due to their opinions on how the country should be run: The Royalists, and the Parliamentarians. The Royalists were those people who supported Charles I and his successor, while the Parliamentarians were those who supported the idea that Parliament should have a larger role in government affairs. Milton was a Parliamentarian and was an outspoken enemy of Charles I, having written numerous essays and pamphlets regarding his ideas as to how the government should be run, and “In one very famous pamphlet, he actually defended Parliament's right to behead the king should the king be found inadequate.” Charles I was seen as a corrupt and incompetent ruler, and “the Parliamentarians were fed up with their king and wanted Parliament to play a more important role in English politics and government.” This belief was held because of the unethical and tyrannical behavior of ruler Charles I. During his reign, he violated the liberties of his people and acted with hypocrisy and a general disregard for his subjects. Examples of his abuse of power in...

    Read More

More about Explain Why The House Of Lords Should Be Abolished Essay

Open Document